XP 'works' in 64mb.. it works in 128mb.. look through the major manufacturer
websites and you will see that this is the minimum memory offered on 'value'
systems.. 256mb is more the norm on anything other than value.. 512mb is
offered on 'performance' models..
One also has to remember that these manufacturers ALWAYS start with the
minimum required for any given performance designation.. realistically, you
are looking at 256mb as a base start.. if you need to move graphics around
on any of the computers, you then have to look to 512mb as the minimum..
heavy graphics require at least 1gb..
I have mentioned 'minimum' throughout.. XP will handle 4gb, but that would
be overkill for most users.. as with everything, the law of diminishing
returns applies to memory.. the majority of serious users here would agree
that XP benefits from at least 512mb for general use..
Ultimately, whatever each computer is asked to do will determine how much
RAM is installed.. there are no hard and fast rules.. it is up to you to
decide if you want each computer to just about do the job, or do the job
relatively easily..
IMHO, and probably the opinion of most computer service engineers, 256mb is
the minimum, 512mb is good, and above that is required for maximum push..
Mike Hall
Mr Major Thorburn said:
Mike, thanks for that.
I was hoping to find some references in some planning documents or a field
report that would help me to give a basis for that size of memory.
The documents I have found so far on the Micrsoft Website are in
resources/desktop/deployment/planning.asp
Would you happen to know of any performance reports or tuning guides that
may or may not quote 512 as the 'working' memory size?
Regards, Major.
